This is a discussion on 06 WRX vs. 06 Civic Si within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally Posted by Integra96
Llama meal
Fine, if thats the way you want to be about it
I am the ...

Did anyone every figure out which magazine this way about? I want to read it myself.

FWIW, equally driven 06 Civic v WRX with same tires, I'll put it on the 06 Civic on an Autox course. Road course, the WRX will truly "wack" the Civic. (nod to blarg).

Nod to Integra. The 06 WRX will not "run with the STi" for a stage 2 upgrade for less than a $1000. First, good luck pricing out an AP, UP, and Catback for that price (of good quality...it can be done if you are patient I guess). You are also forgetting the turbo. Yeah, I've seen the numbers too. Until I see them head to head, my money is still on the STi (in the 1/4) and definitly on the STi in the twisties (since that $1000 didn't go to anything else like tires, suspension, brakes, etc.)

Is there any definitive performance data yet on what an 06 AP stage 2 WRX can do in the 1/4 yet? Maybe I'm out of the loop.

I was only predicting that an '06 WRX with an already catless uppipe (free), catless downpipe ($300) and a Cobb AP on Stage 2 ($550) will have very similar 1/4 mile times as a stock STI; remember the '02-'05 Stage 2 WRXs are already in STI 1/4 mile territory. There are no tests yet, but this setup should be good for low 13s @ 100mph+, like an STI.

"Did you sleep well?"
"No, I made a couple of mistakes."
-- Steven Wright

just thought youd guys would like to know it was a comparison between the civic si and the 06 impreza 2.5 "i" not a wrx. so toe to toe a "WRX" would still eat that thing alive BUT a 2.5"i" is comparable.

outside of the ricers that have given honda a bad street name, this car is great for what its worth. theres alot that comes standard to that car that you can't find unless you spend alot more. the k20a engine inside is very responsive but some of what has been posted about it is alittle off the wall. with the proper tuning and money, any car can be made fast. in my area theres a honda civic putting 430/381 to the wheels but it has traction problems and took alot to get it there. As usual the Integra based models in honda world are always a slight step up as will the trend be with the next model to be released.

so for the person who wants some pep, good gas milage, lots of features and can't afford alot, might lean towards the civic over the 2.5i. the wrx is in totaly different class. that a person in that position more then likely wont be able to afford as easily.

just thought youd guys would like to know it was a comparison between the civic si and the 06 impreza 2.5 "i" not a wrx. so toe to toe a "WRX" would still eat that thing alive BUT a 2.5"i" is comparable.

outside of the ricers that have given honda a bad street name, this car is great for what its worth. theres alot that comes standard to that car that you can't find unless you spend alot more. the k20a engine inside is very responsive but some of what has been posted about it is alittle off the wall. with the proper tuning and money, any car can be made fast. in my area theres a honda civic putting 430/381 to the wheels but it has traction problems and took alot to get it there. As usual the Integra based models in honda world are always a slight step up as will the trend be with the next model to be released.

so for the person who wants some pep, good gas milage, lots of features and can't afford alot, might lean towards the civic over the 2.5i. the wrx is in totaly different class. that a person in that position more then likely wont be able to afford as easily.

errrrummmmm...please note my first sentence was a request to allow me to read the article myself.

Also, after a little more review since we now know it is the RS that was compared, I say that if it were a short autox track, an RS equipped with sports minded tires would take an SI. Torque is king here, and the 166 ftlbs of the 3000 lb RS trumps the 139 lb ft of the almost 2900 lb Civic CI.

Are we sure? Some threads on nasty crack were talking about this, too, and they were talking WRX.

I am not sure, no.

I think I actually just bought his magazine about 3 days ago but its in my backpack... which is my car.... which is outside.... which currently has temp's of 30 degrees.... while there is currently snow flurries in the air

I haven't read this whole post becuase I'm pretty lazy, but I used to be under the misconception that since they had the same trap speeds, it was catching up. The thing is, I have a buddy who runs the 1/8 mile in 8.9 at 90 and I run it in 8.3 around a 86-87 typically. He was like I'm catching you at the end, but the thing that goes un-noticed is that it's taking him 8.9seconds to get to 90, where it's only taking me 8.3, I tried to explain to him that in 8.9 seconds, I'm going much faster than 90 and he isn't catching me. So just because two cars trap the same, you gotta realize that it has to do with power curve not so much just power, and you have to look at the difference in time.

I haven't read this whole post becuase I'm pretty lazy, but I used to be under the misconception that since they had the same trap speeds, it was catching up. The thing is, I have a buddy who runs the 1/8 mile in 8.9 at 90 and I run it in 8.3 around a 86-87 typically. He was like I'm catching you at the end, but the thing that goes un-noticed is that it's taking him 8.9seconds to get to 90, where it's only taking me 8.3, I tried to explain to him that in 8.9 seconds, I'm going much faster than 90 and he isn't catching me. So just because two cars trap the same, you gotta realize that it has to do with power curve not so much just power, and you have to look at the difference in time.

What you say here does make some sense, however, to say that he isnt catching you you really have to look at more than just the ET and trap-speed, launch will play a big factor in that for one thing.

For example, on your 8.3 1/8 mile lets say you ran a 2.0 60' time, and on his 8.9 second 60' time he ran a 2.3 60' lets say due to bad traction/launch ect... Now you likely hooked up and are at maximum acceleration for 0.3-0.5 seconds longer than him at least, and also keep in mind that as the tires on a car are spinning it is still moving forward just not nearly as fast as its capable of. Now once he hooks up, not only have you been at or close to full acceleration alot longer than him, but since he was spinning (and therefor not accelerating equal to his cars power potential) for a longer section of the track, he has less time to catch up to your speed, and he's eaten more of the distance he has to accelerate in, so he has less distance under full acceleration.

He most likely is catching up to you at this point, since although the TIME it takes you to get to 90 may be less than him (since you had better acceleration in the earlier part of the run which will affect your ET alot), the DISTANCE that it has taken you to get to 90 is actually quite a bit longer, since you were spinning less of the track than he was and he still managed to get to a higher speed within that shorter distance.

Since you're only going 1/8 mile you're cutting off both of your accelerations pretty early, given a full 1/4 mile he might catch up completely or even pass you assuming his car's gearing doesnt drop off sharply in the upper gears (or he isnt limited by a 3 or 4 speed that winds out at 110mph for example).

EDIT (I forgot this): Also, contrary to what it might seem like, your NOT going to gain that much more speed by 8.9 seconds, you will actually probably be going about 91-92. Think of it this way, in the first 1/8 mile you accelerated 87mph total over that whole 8.3 seconds, now in the 2nd 1/8th of a mile you accelerated about another 20mph in about 4.5 seconds (going by the 12.8 @ 112 in your sig), and in only 0.6 seconds your going to cover about 3-4mph of that 20...

I haven't read this whole post becuase I'm pretty lazy, but I used to be under the misconception that since they had the same trap speeds, it was catching up. The thing is, I have a buddy who runs the 1/8 mile in 8.9 at 90 and I run it in 8.3 around a 86-87 typically. He was like I'm catching you at the end, but the thing that goes un-noticed is that it's taking him 8.9seconds to get to 90, where it's only taking me 8.3, I tried to explain to him that in 8.9 seconds, I'm going much faster than 90 and he isn't catching me. So just because two cars trap the same, you gotta realize that it has to do with power curve not so much just power, and you have to look at the difference in time.

technically he is catching up. Will he actually catch you and pass you because of his superior trap speed? Eventually, but at considerably higher speeds. Trap speeds are better indicators of who will win a highway or rolling race as opposed to a 1/4mile race.

vBulletin Message

Errors

The following errors occurred with your submission

Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Password:

Confirm Password:

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Email Address:

Please enter a valid email address for yourself. We strongly suggest that you stay away from using aol, yahoo, msn, and hotmail accounts. Sometimes the mail server blocks the emails from our server. As a result you will not receive any notifications including the confirmation email.

Log-in

User Name:

Password:

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.